|Subject: ||Re: Support the QuakeLives project...|
|Date: ||12/30/99 5:07:08 PM|
> ROFL no it IS a big deal
> QUAKE IS NOT LICENCED AS FREE SOFTWARE, THAT MEANS
> EVERYTHING COMING FROM THE QUAKE SOURCE CODE MUST
> COME WITH THE SOURCE CODE WHEN RELESED
> thats all I want, is the QuakeLives source code
> Thank you very much
There is nothing in the GPL that stops Open Source software from linking to or working with closed source software. The GPL guarantees that "derivative" works remain open source.
If somebody comes along and uses the Quake Audio Routines in their program, then the GPL insists that this program must be open source, because it has then become a "derivative" work.
That is different than somebody modifying Quake to use a closed source library. For instance, somebody develops a library that is used to verify the authenticity of files (they don't even have to be executables or quake specific files). They would then modify the quake source to link to this library and use it to verify that the clients are who they say they are. Because this library is *NOT* a derivative product, it does not have to be open sourced (unless of course it was built using some portions of the quake source code, but obviously that's not their intent so they wouldn't do that).
Now, I believe the goal of the Quake Lives project is to do just that. Because the code would be seperate, and not based off of the Quake code, they can do anything they want with it. However, they are obligated to release the Quake code that CALLS this library, which I'm sure they will do, in strict accordance with the GPL.
Now, if you're going to be a close minded idiot, and not read the actual license and try to fully understand it, let me use another example: People are currently porting Quake to use DirectX. DirectX is an external library used for rendering the graphics to the screen. DirectX is a Microsoft technology, and it is *NOT* open source, and it does not have to become open source if somebody ports Quake to use it. That's perfectly legal, and in fact it's a necessary part of the GPL. Much code that exists out there is not open source, and while it's nice to have all code be open source, it would be a terrible thing to cripple programmers from using much of the code that existed beforehand.
Now, before you go running your mouth off half cocked about this Quake lives project, and how you are so high and mighty and how they have to release the code... maybe you should spend some time fully understanding the issues involved. You might not sound like such a moron, and might gain an ounce of credibility (which you currently don't have).
-- Key Excerpts --
2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files a
nd the date of any change.
b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.
c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively when run, you must cause it, when started running for such interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on the Program is not required to print an announcement.)
These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are
not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or collective works based on the Program.